MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388660517 · doi:10.3390/axioms12111048

Multi-Objective Non-Linear Programming Problems in Linear Diophantine Fuzzy Environment

2023· article· en· W4388660517 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAxioms · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Mathematical Programming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiophantine equationMathematical optimizationLinear programmingMathematicsLinear-fractional programmingFuzzy logicNonlinear programmingNonlinear systemComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to various unpredictable factors, a decision maker frequently experiences uncertainty and hesitation when dealing with real-world practical optimization problems. At times, it’s necessary to simultaneously optimize a number of non-linear and competing objectives. Linear Diophantine fuzzy numbers are used to address the uncertain parameters that arise in these circumstances. The objective of this manuscript is to present a method for solving a linear Diophantine fuzzy multi-objective nonlinear programming problem (LDFMONLPP). All the coefficients of the nonlinear multi-objective functions and the constraints are linear Diophantine fuzzy numbers (LDFNs). Here we find the solution of the nonlinear programming problem by using Karush-Kuhn-Tucker condition. A numerical example is presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it